[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 80 (Monday, April 27, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20612-20613]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-11002]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
[C-508-605]
Industrial Phosphoric Acid from Israel; Amended Final Results of
Countervailing Duty Administrative Review.
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce
ACTION: Notice of amended final results of countervailing duty
administrative review.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On March 20, 1998, the Department of Commerce published in
[[Page 20613]]
the Federal Register the final results of its administrative review of
the countervailing duty order on Industrial Phosphoric Acid from Israel
(63 FR 13626) for the period January 1, 1995 through December 31, 1995.
This review covers Rotem-Amfert Negev Ltd. Based on the correction of a
ministerial error, we are amending the final results of this review. We
determine the net subsidies to be 8.77 percent ad valorem for the
period of review. We will instruct the U.S. Customs Service to assess
countervailing duties as indicated above.
EFFECTIVE DATE: April 27, 1998.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher Cassel or Lorenza Olivas,
Office of CVD/AD Enforcement VI, Import Administration, International
Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
2786.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On March 20, 1998, the Department of Commerce published in the
Federal Register the final results of its Administrative Review of the
countervailing duty order on Industrial Phosphoric Acid from Israel for
the period January 1, 1995 through December 31, 1995 (63 FR 13626)
(Final Results). On March 23, 1998, the Department received a timely
allegation from Rotem-Amfert Negev, Ltd., that the Department had made
ministerial errors in its calculation of the benefit rate. The
petitioners did not allege the existence of ministerial errors, nor
have they commented on respondent's allegations.
Applicable Statute
Unless otherwise indicated, all citations to the statute are
references to the provisions of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by
the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (URAA) effective January 1, 1995 (the
Act).
Scope of the Order
Imports covered by this order are shipments of industrial
phosphoric acid (IPA) from Israel. Such merchandise is classifiable
under item number 2809.20.00 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTS).
The HTS item number is provided for convenience and U.S. Customs
Service (Customs) purposes. The written description of the scope
remains dispositive.
Ministerial Errors in Final Results of Review
The respondent alleges that the Department made two ministerial
errors in the final results. First, the respondent contends that the
Department incorrectly added the amounts of the grant provided to Rotem
in 1989 under project 9 of the Encouragement of Capital Investments Law
program. The Department agrees that this is a ministerial error, and we
have amended our final results. Second, the respondent alleges that the
Department used incorrect data to calculate the gamma in the
privatization calculations by using respondent's net worth in nominal
shekels and then converting the shekel value into U.S. dollars.
Respondents suggest that the Department should use data from Rotem's
balance sheets that express the company's net worth in U.S. dollars. We
do not consider the nature of respondent's allegation to be
ministerial. Therefore, we have not adjusted the gamma calculation.
(For further information, see the Decision Memorandum to Maria Harris
Tildon, Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration,
dated April 15, 1998, which is a public document and is on file in the
Central Records Unit, Room B-099 of the main Commerce Building.)
Amended Final Results of Review
For the period January 1, 1995 through December 31, 1995, we
determine the net subsidies to be 8.77 percent ad valorem after
correction of the ministerial error. We will instruct Customs to assess
countervailing duties as indicated above. The Department will also
instruct Customs to collect cash deposits of estimated countervailing
duties in the percentages detailed above of the f.o.b. invoice price on
all shipments of the subject merchandise from reviewed companies,
entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the
date of publication of the final results of this review. Because the
URAA replaced the general rule in favor of a country-wide rate with a
general rule in favor of individual rates for investigated and reviewed
companies, the procedures for establishing countervailing duty rates,
including those for non-reviewed companies, are now essentially the
same as those in antidumping cases, except as provided for in Section
777A(e)(2)(B) of the Act. The requested review will normally cover only
those companies specifically named. See 19 CFR 355.22(a). Pursuant to
19 CFR 355.22(g), for all companies for which a review was not
requested, duties must be assessed at the cash deposit rate, and cash
deposits must continue to be collected at the rate previously ordered.
As such, the countervailing duty cash deposit rate applicable to a
company can no longer change, except pursuant to a request for a review
of that company. See Federal-Mogul Corporation and The Torrington
Company v. United States, 822 F.Supp. 782 (CIT 1993) and Floral Trade
Council v. United States, 822 F.Supp. 766 (CIT 1993) (interpreting 19
CFR 353.22(e), the antidumping regulation on automatic assessment,
which is identical to 19 CFR 355.22(g)). Therefore, the cash deposit
rates for all companies except those covered by this review will be
unchanged by the results of this review.
We will instruct Customs to continue to collect cash deposits for
non-reviewed companies at the most recent company-specific or country-
wide rate applicable to the company. Accordingly, the cash deposit
rates that will be applied to non-reviewed companies covered by this
order will be the rate for that company established in the most
recently completed administrative proceeding conducted under the URAA.
If such a review has not been conducted, the rate established in the
most recently completed administrative proceeding pursuant to the
statutory provisions that were in effect prior to the URAA amendments
is applicable. See 61 FR 28841. These rates shall apply to all non-
reviewed companies until a review of a company assigned these rates is
requested. In addition, for the period January 1, 1995 through December
31, 1995, the assessment rates applicable to all non-reviewed companies
covered by this order are the cash deposit rates in effect at the time
of entry.
This notice serves as a reminder to parties subject to
administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility
concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 355.34(d). Timely written notification of
return/destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial
protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the
regulations and the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.
This amendment of final results of reviews and notice are in
accordance with section 751(f) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(f)) and 19
CFR 355.28(c).
Dated: April 17, 1998.
Joseph A. Spetrini,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 98-11002 Filed 4-24-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
